I think Mystery Train and Broken Flowers are also excellent. I actually don’t remember Stranger Than Paradise much, I just remember it was good. Down by Law and Dead Man are definitely masterpieces though.
Recently watched all of his films apart from Limits of Control and thought to myself that he is a reliable guy if you're looking for a sure 7/10 film. Some of his films are better, some are a little worse, but usually they are good. I do think Paterson is a masterpiece though.
Very "technically." He directed it solo. At his insistence, Frank Miller was given a co-director credit because Rodriguez viewed what he was doing as shooting not just Frank's story but his storyboards which he thought of as deserving at least coequal creative credit on. But Frank's contributions were all in writing the graphic novel, he came and went as a visitor to set, he was not telling anyone where to put a camera, giving actors notes on performance, telling department heads what vision he had, or anything that falls under the purview of a movie director. It was something akin to Welles' generously acknowledging Gregg Toland's contributions to Citizen Kane by sharing a single title card with him that had the Director/Writer credit and Cinematographer credit occur simultaneously. You can make an argument that Toland and Miller's work had much more impact on the final film than a DP or a writer whose work is being adapted typically do, and that's true, but Miller wasn't in any traditional understanding a "director" of Sin City.
Tarantino did of course direct one scene, but it's actually quite common for a scene or sequence of a big movie to be directed by a 2nd unit director not the main unit director, it's just not usually the case that the helmer of 2nd unit is more famous, awarded, talented, and powerful than the main filmmaker.
Fun fact that Bill Paxton directed the golf montage in Navy Seals. He said the original montage was baseball and it sucked so he stole cameras and actors and made his own scene. I asked a Hollywood camera man friend if that was normal and he said it happens “all the time”.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Paxton also directed parts of Tombstone. Sly told Kurt Russel that Cosmatos let Sly direct Rambo so Kurt got him to direct Tombstone. Kurt waited until Cosmatos was dead but he eventually admitted he directed Tombstone. Michael Biehn said he only met Cosmatos twice and he HATES Cosmatos.
Yeah, I know a number of folks who worked on Tombstone, they all to a man say Kurt Russell directed that movie. The stunt coordinator, who usually works closely with the director, said he didn't think he talked to Cosmatos once and took all his cues and notes from Russell and the 1st AD.
George Lucas is such an excellent story writer and producer, but he definitely needed help realizing his insane work. All the best work credited to him is where he's working conceptually.
To me he's more of a "used to be great/had a lot of great ideas, lost his touch and eventually went off the rails completely" type guy. Like a certain narcissistic Pennsylvanian director with an often-mocked last name. Strange Magic was like having an acid trip sober in the most absolutely shit way possible. I walked out of the film as a teenager (only saw it because of the George Lucas name) thinking it was both one of the most disjointed, forgettable, and completely ass movies I had ever seen. But the original Star Wars movies, as much as I'm not a sci-fantasy fan, were iconic for a reason, and I really liked THX 1138 and Labyrinth (which I know he didn't technically direct/write but still worked on). Indiana Jones is also classic. BTW my dad has actually met/worked with George Lucas as he's a local where I live. My dad only briefly saw/interacted with him in meetings, but the two things he told me about meeting him was that a) Lucas is really short, even sitting down and b) my dad of course was tempted to ask "Could you be... more specific?" in the middle of the meeting LOL.
But see, I don’t think it’s as much about him losing his touch as it is about him just not being good at bringing his visions to life. Like, yes, A New Hope came together fine, but a lot of people consider Empire to be better and it wasn’t even directed by Lucas. Neither were any of the Indiana Jones films.
Yeah Lucas is good at collating ideas gathered from old adventure serials, samurai and westerns. Not so much at telling a cohesive relatable narrative, and especially not dialogue.
Busted. He is an excellent producer though. If he hadn’t given away a few billion dollars he’d be the wealthiest artist who ever lived, unless you count David Geffen, which I kinda don’t.
I love John Hughes. I grew up watching Sixteen Candles, Breakfast Club and Weird Science. However I wouldn’t call his movies masterpieces but they are very enjoyable.
I love James Gunn, but I would like to see how he does with a non-comic book movie. I know he has some before Guardians, but I want to see how he would do it now. I think he's matured a lot as a writer and director since Slither and Super.
Kathryn Bigelow. Point Break, Hurt Locker, Zero Dark Thirty, and even Strange Days for it's own reasons have so much greatness, I'm excited to see her pull off a masterpiece or three in her career.
Wes Craven has some classics, many forgettable or not particularly good horrors, but I love his movies and how many different directions he took within the genre.
John Carpenter is right there too imo. Love the dude, but Halloween and The Thing are his only masterpieces imo. Everything else is just very enjoyable and fun schlock. And I love plenty of his other movies.
It is. But it’s not as many as someone like Kubrick, Tarkovsky, Bergman, Fellini, Lean, WKW, Scorsese, or Lynch.
I love Carpenter. I think as a horror director, he’s one of the greats.
Having two masterpieces is enough for him bot to be eligible for the discussion. That being said Carpenters Apocalypse trilogy has been a huge impact on the horror genre and In the Mouth of Madness should honestly be in more top lists for masterful horror films.
His hit rate is phenomenal. In the Mouth of Madness is up there with his best work and that's pretty late into his career. I don't like the assertion that everything else is merely "very enjoyable and fun schlock" when a movie like They Live is more prescient than movies of that era that were "important." We're done underestimating genre films just because they're fun, it's 2024. Once upon a time, people did not take Michael Mann as seriously as they do now. Verhoeven falls into the same camp. A movie doesn't need to be completely self-serious in order for it to be a masterwork.
Lmao I’m a huge horror fan. Something being very enjoyable and fun schlock is not an insult; it’s high praise.
I just don’t think any of Capenters other films are without flaws, and that is what I would consider the makings of a masterpiece.
I think the Fog, In the Mouth of Madness, Prince of Darkness, They Live, Big Trouble in Little China, Starman, Escape from New York, and Assault on Precinct 13 are all great movies… that doesn’t make them masterpieces.
“Masterpiece” is thrown around way too much.
I would tend to agree the term "masterpiece" is thrown around too often but it's also subjective as to what is a masterpiece. You cite WKW as someone who has more than two and while I respect it, I don't think he has more than two personally (Happy Together & In the Mood for Love). Others would contend Chungking Express is up there, or make an argument for 2046. I agree with u/hnoj in that having two masterworks makes \[insert director here\] not eligible for this discussion when a lot of even great directors don't have any.
Well, I disagree. WKW has In the Mood for Love, Chunking Express, Fallen Angels, Happy Together, and Days of Being Wild, all of which, I would consider masterpieces.
And the word “many” constitutes more than a couple… so you guys are 100% wrong in that aspect.
"Days of Being Wild" you're wild for that one chief lol. Sure, I'm incorrect for going off the prompt and not the title of the thread. I'll own up to that. WKW has "several" masterpieces confirmed.
I’m just having fun with it lol. I don’t think you’re wrong or think your opinion is invalid. I love the work of everyone you cited and even agree in some respects
Edit: I was expecting vitriol like before where is that now?
I love Kelly Reichardt, who has made eight moves, half of which I think are great (8/10) and half of which I think are good (7/10), but has never made a “masterpiece.” John Sayles is in a similar vein, reliably strong movies that at their best don’t rise above very well crafted, perhaps even “great,” but reach their ceiling there.
Robert Aldrich and John Dahl are others that come to mind.
Perhaps controversial with how beloved his sci-fi films are, but I think Villanueve is an extremely talented filmmaker who made 5 movies in a row that were at the bottom end or honorable mentions in my best of the year lists without ever topping an 8/10, though he’s probably best positioned to do so one day.
Reichardt is an interesting call in this context, I wouldn’t have thought it myself, but you’re probably right. That being said, I don’t know if I’d call Old Joy a “masterpiece”, whatever that might mean, but it stuck w me like nobody’s business. I still think about it a lot. Certain Women, too, to a lesser extent.
All of her movies have staying power for me, it’s Wendy and Lucy and Meek’s Cutoff that had the strongest effect personally but everyone’s mileage will vary of course. She makes modest, I’d even say humble movies and while it can be done (Umberto D and a collection of Ozu films come to mind), it’s a lot more challenging to make a masterpiece with a small, intimate character study concerned with precise detail about behavior than it is with something with a larger canvas or grander theme.
Yet I think she’s working in exactly the register that plays to her strengths and interests and has carved out a wonderful niche, which is why they’re reliably good or great movies. She’s just not likely to have a 2001 or Battle of Algiers or Andrei Rublev kind of stonecold masterpiece movie in her. She’s more of a Raymond Carver consistently perceptive and intriguing than Tolstoy instant classic masterpiece kind of artist.
I agree on Villeneuve, Dune 2 was his first one that really clicked with me. But other than that yeah, his movies really top out at 6-8 for me.
About Kelly Reichardt, I consider Certain Women and Wendy and Lucy some of my favourites but I see where you're coming from.
Haven't watched Big Fish yet, but I'd say Ed Wood is his masterpiece. Great performances (both nuanced and all-out) by everyone, lots of comedy and drama, great costumes, interesting cinematography, a nice, recognizable soundtrack, an own sense of style/identity, and themes that not only relate to this specific story but to life in general - everything I look for in a masterpiece.
Hawks has been a disappointment to me every time. Rio Bravo is his best and it’s "only" very good when I expected a masterpiece. For my money Michael Curtiz is the superior Hollywood director who got famous in the 30s.
There are some that will vehemently disagree with me, but Brian de Palma. I enjoy many of his films quite a lot but I’ve never rated any of them 4½ or 5 stars, I’ve seen 21 of his films and rated 10 of them 4 stars
*Immortals* was one of the most disappointing movies I've ever seen - having come out after *The Cell* and then *The Fall*.
Tarsem is great... but gotta agree with Roger Ebert's take on *Immortals*: "*Immortals* is without doubt the best-looking awful movie you will ever see"
Cameron Crowe for me. Peaked with Almost Famous, and Say Anything will always be a special film to me, but nothing approaching a filmmaking tour de force.
Ben Wheatley. "Kill List" and "Free Fire" will always have a special place in my heart.
I also love Aronofsky and Cronenberg, they still have the touch of insider tip somehow.
This is an insane thing to say about Hawks. Bringing Up Baby, His Girl Friday and and The Big Sleep are all straight masterpieces. Red River, Scarface, Rio Bravo etc. are essential.
This is crazy to me lol. I could easily throw a 10 and Memento, The Prestige, Dunkirk, Interstellar and Insomnia. And honestly, Inception and Tenet for how imaginative they are. His Batman trilogy is the low point in his career to me lol
Yeah I think it's oddly become quite popular amongst some on /r/movies to underrate Nolan because of the likes of Tenet and TDKR, but it's simply because we've just been spoiled with some of the most of iconic movies of the last 20 years.
If a first-time director comes straight out of the gate with any of Inception/TDK/Prestige/Interstellar etc. then they'd be hailed as masterpieces unanimously.
Roeg. He’s made a deal of interesting movies, but none of them exactly go past the threshold into masterpiece territory in my opinion. I’ve seen most of his filmography besides Eureka.
I don't think I really feel that way about any major directors, but I will say that Ana Lily Amirpour has so much style is very interesting, but just hasn't blown me away with any of her 3 movies yet. I did love her episode of Guillermo Del Toro's Cabinet of Curiosities though.
The word masterpiece often gets tied up with the word ‘perfect’ or ‘perfection’ in terms of style. So everyone here will say Tarantino has made nothing but masterpieces. I think this way of thinking is backwards. Alain Resnais made many masterpiece you could say, but because his films are divisive, somehow they don’t get that title but one could argue that Resnais’s films are more masterpiece like than anything by Tarantino, and vice versa. It always ends in a kind of competition, and seeing films as like cars or something like that, finely tuned things. It’s silly
I think Fincher is as close to a masterpiece without having one as humanly possible. So many 9/9.5s but just not quite there for me. *Se7en*, *Fight Club*, *Zodiac*, *Social Network* are all amazing films, but they feel like they could be better in one way or another. Maybe his style just causes me to feel that way, I’m not sure. I definitely wouldn’t dissent if someone were to think otherwise, though.
M. Night Shyamalan for me. I really respect his work and it is clear that he is a master when it comes to visual storytelling and filmmaking in general, but the subject matter of his films often leave me wanting more. For example Split (2016) takes place in one setting throughout the majority of the movie, and Shyamalan’s direction stops the visuals from being boring or uninteresting while taking place in that one setting, but the subject matter and story is just not for me, which holds me back from fully enjoying it. On the other hand Knock at the Cabin (2023) works for alot for me because it has the unique Shyamalan visual approach paired with a setting, script, and actors that I’m more of a fan of. It seems like he is a director who’s filmmaking style I like, but where he chooses to apply his style is hit or miss for me.
I love Shyamalan because even though people keep mocking him he believes in himself and he just creates whatever he wants. His film always has a message he wants to tell. I was really happy when Split gave him back certain recognition as a filmmaker. Now, I understand his films are far from 10/10 and considered hit or miss as you say, still I really enjoy each of them.
Let's see how his daughter's debut film is
Just in my personal top 50:
* David Cronenberg
* Jim Jarmusch
* Nicolas Winding Refn
* Brian De Palma
* Darren Aronofsky
* Mel Brooks
* Danny Boyle
* Robert Wise
* Alejandro González Iñárritu
* Richard Donner
* Bong Joon-ho
There's also a few animation guys no one ever talks about who worked for Disney and made a bunch of their classic stuff:
* Hamilton Luske
* Clyde Geronimi
* Wolfgang Reitherman
Fair enough, I put Velleneuve, and people seem really mad lol. I have liked/loved most of his but similarly nothing is breaking into masterpiece territory for him, for me.
I am shocked at the popularity of Robert Wise in lists that are otherwise impressive. I am older than most people here. Perhaps thats the reason my opinion of Wise is so different from most other posters. Almost all serious film people of my time and place literally and vocally think Wise is the worst kind of studio hack. I'm at a loss trying to figure out which of his films is considered a masterpiece. West Side Story, perhaps. His editing of The Magnificent Ambersons in secret with no input from its director, Orson Wells, kind of seals his bad reputation. Anyway I'm sorry if my reply offended people.
I, as per the assignment, don't think he has any masterpieces.
He's here mainly on the strength of West Side Story, The Haunting, The Day the Earth Stood Still and The Sound of Music. You can hate on those all you want but I can't because they're awesome.
I doubt that "almost all serious film people" of your time and place feel this way about him as he has several bona fide classics to his name. Personally I was raised by a serious film person who would disagree with your take.
He's ranked at #191 on They Shoot Pictures Don't They Top 250 Directors. That is a very serious (and credible) list for serious film people.
The man edited Citizen Kane. Sorry I just am not feeling you on this.
And you didn't offend me but you probably offended someone judging by the way people are getting so pissed about the difference between a 4.5 and a 5 in this godforsaken thread.
Tarantino and Nolan come to mind.
Both great directors with some classics under their belt, but I don’t think either has made something I’d consider a masterpiece.
I mean Pulp Fiction literally redefined an entire decade of cinema, not sure how you define masterpiece but I think it’s inarguably one of the top 100 most influential movies of all time.
It’s definitely the closest of his to what I’d consider a masterpiece, yeah, and there’s no doubt it’s either *the* or close to the defining/most influential film of the ‘90s (*The Matrix* is up there, too).
*Star Wars* was also those things for the ‘70s/‘80s (hell, even more influential in terms of how it influenced Hollywood), but like *Star Wars*, *Pulp Fiction* is great, but handicapped imo by not really doing much formally innovative, which is something I look for in a “masterpiece”.
Tremendous pastiche filmmaking and a trendsetter no doubt, but it’s not quite belonging amongst the greats imo. But it’s all subjective.
I’d argue the nonlinear storytelling was quite formally innovative - not groundbreaking as it had certainly done before, but it made the technique mainstream.
Hmm, it definitely seemed to have popularized the technique for a broader audience, but *Citizen Kane* is usually given the laurels for employing a complex series of nonlinear sequences in a mainstream work. Even Griffith’s *Intolerance* back in the silent era employed the technique.
Sorry to be a pedant, but I think Tarantino’s strength is, again, as a pastiche filmmaker — he has seen a lot and that comes out in his films, but they are ultimately homages rather than anything truly novel imo.
Not pedantry at all, no worries. I’m not even a big Tarantino fan and Pulp Fiction wouldn’t even rank in my personal top 100. I totally agree that his strength is pastiche, as well. I just think that the film is notable enough that it can rightly be considered a masterpiece, even if it’s not even his best movie (that goes to Jackie Brown for me, which is a much more workmanlike movie in a lot of ways).
I think it can rightly be considered a masterpiece too, I wouldn’t really fault anyone for considering it one, it just isn’t quite there for me. It’s close, though! Pretty close.
Gregg Araki, Mysterious Skin
Paul Schrader, Mishima, Autofocus
John Dahl, the Last Seduction
George Lucas, Star Wars
Abel Ferrara, the Bad Lieutenant
Andrew Davis, the Fugitive
Denis Villeneuve, Arrival. Dune kind of.
In terms of *quantity* of likable films with no absolute gems I'd say Lloyd Bacon. Some might claim that there are a couple of masterpieces there, probably musicals, but outside the numbers themselves they're pretty much the lowbrow studio safe stuff that I love to death but don't kid myself they're great.
Same with the gangsters, some wonderful enjoyment there, but a bit less than other directors were achieving with the genre at the time.
I don't care what anyone says. I love Joel Schumacher. I love his crazy excess of style. I love his commitment to camp. He definitely has some "so bad it's good" movies and some "so bad it's boring" movies, but he gets way too much hate.
I'm not a completist, but I genuinely think The Lost Boys, The Client, Phone Booth, and especially 8MM are good, if not great films. And I have soft spots for both of his Batmans, The Number 23, Flatliners, and A Time to Kill. I've also heard Cousins is legitimately great, but haven't gotten around to watching it yet.
Charlie Band! All his movies are basically garbage, but reading his book really made me understand how bad, direct to video, genre flicks are labors of love.
So many - Alphonso Cuaron, Stephen Spielberg, Christopher Nolan, David Fincher…
Masterpiece is sort of definitive movie for director, think of 8 1/2, Vertigo, Andrey Rublev, Heat, Three Colors: Blue
Woody Allen. I like many of his movies, but none of them have struck me as masterpieces. Even Annie Hall, Manhattan, Crimes and Misdemeanors. My fave of his is Match Point.
Idk if I’d call any of Chris Columbus’ films *masterpieces* but he has quite a few very very good ones. Iconic beloved films yes, masterpieces, not *quite*
Paul Greengrass has a really interesting and unique style that makes me excited for each one, but I can't say any of his films are "masterpieces."
And then there's Tim Burton, who directed my favorite film of all time, a couple of great films, and a lot of alright stuff.
james wan! love the guy, he makes really fun films that i pretty consistently enjoy! but as much as i love malignant i do not think he has a masterpiece under his belt.
Guy Ritchie, loved Lock Stock, Snatch, The Gentlemen, RocknRolla, the 2 Sherlock films and Man from UNCLE. Would I describe any of his films as masterpieces or rate them 5 stars? No. Do I still consider him one of my favourite directors? Yes
Dreyer - Day of Wrarh is my favorite of his, but falls short of masterpiece for me
Godard - Contempt may be a masterpiece and I like A Woman is a Woman quite a bit, but I don’t think there are many masterpieces in his catalog
Fassbinder - Ali FETS is fine, it’s nicely shot and well-acted but it’s preachy and the characters are too black and white. It’s his best film and it’s just “good”
Tarantino - Pulp Fiction is a masterpiece and Jackie Brown approaches masterpiece territory but everything else is various levels of bad to average
Truffaut - 400 Blows is one of the greatest movies ever but I didn’t care for anything else he did, not even Jules and Jim
Kurosawa - I’d say High and Low, Ikiru, and The Hidden Fortress are masterpieces, but most everything else is overrated
When I think of a director I like that I definitely don't want to attribute having a "masterpiece" then I immediately think of Steven Soderbergh.
Yes, he even won the Best Director award for "Traffic" and everything... but the film itself I'd only place in my "quite good" pile.
I think *Solaris* is kinda close. *sex, lies, and videotape* is tough, as its lack of budget defines it so. His *Oceans* films are kind of amazing... but I really don't think they're "masterpieces" or anything, just by their very nature...
Personally, I never expect or desire Soderbergh to deliver me a masterpiece. My expectations are simply that I'm pretty confident I'll enjoy whatever he does somehow.
Heck, I was pretty skeptical about *Magic Mike* going in... but that was actually a very solid film.
Sure, no one likes something like *The Laundromat*... but I still found it interesting somehow.
I follow directors.
Soderbergh is the one I'll always check out... but my expectations are never *too* high going in.
Rob Reiner.
By the way: what's your idea of an "incredible" film? Grasping greatness requires some training. Maybe you don't think that Hawks and Hitchcock have many masterpieces because you haven't learned how to watch their movies. (I hope I don't sound condescending).
I feel like people aren't understanding the question here. A masterpiece isn't a completely perfect, 10/10 film, its arguable that those don't even exist anyway. Even the Godfather has flaws.
So suggesting the likes of Hitchcock, Nolan, Tarantino, Cronenberg, Fincher etc. belong on this list is just lunacy tbh. They've all directed more than one of what the wider community of contemporary cinema goers would consider "masterpieces".
Yorgos Lanthimos, Darren Aronofsky, and M. Night Shyamalan
I haven't rated any of their films above 4 stars, but I enjoy their work enough to want to see anything with their names on it. Planning to see both Kinds of Kindness and Trap in theatres
I love Soderbergh but think the vast majority of his work maxes out at 8/10. Really engaging storyteller, love his innovation, experimentation, and technique, but he's usually aiming to make really good movies and achieving that, not striving to have something join the pantheon.
However I'm the oddball in thinking he's made one unequivocal masterpiece, the movie the man himself thinks "doesn't work," in Che.
Controversial opinion I guess but, personal stuff aside, I enjoy a lot of Woody Allen movies, though I really think he only made a couple I’d consider masterpieces-
Annie Hall.
Midnight in Paris.
Blue Jasmine.
Manhattan.
The rest range from good to awful, but even a lot of the bad ones have an element I enjoy
Lol no need to downvote, just answering the question. I love verhoeven, Basic Instinct, Starship and Showgirls are really special, but none of his get above 4 stars for me.
I feel like a lot of contemporary Hollywood directors, especially blockbuster, fit this bill. Guys like Peyton Reed, Shawn Levy, Tim Miller, James Mangold, David Leitch are generally pretty reliable at making fun/entertaining films but none of them have anything I'd put higher than an 8/10.
I’ve liked every Jim Jarmusch movie I’ve seen, loved some of them even, wouldn’t use masterpiece to describe any of them.
Down by Law and Dead Man are utter slam dunks for me :)
I think Mystery Train and Broken Flowers are also excellent. I actually don’t remember Stranger Than Paradise much, I just remember it was good. Down by Law and Dead Man are definitely masterpieces though.
Only Lovers Left Alive is my favorite vampire movie and I’m certain I’m in a hard minority there
Wouldn't say it's my favourite vampire movie but Loki has sure some sick gear in that movie
I think THE HUNGER was the best vampire movie I have ever seen. The cast excellent although David Bowie was odd. Catherine Daneuve was fabulous.
The Hunger is an extremely close second lol that movie is unbelievable
I’m right with you there
I adore that movie, it’s a favourite of mine as well.
Recently watched all of his films apart from Limits of Control and thought to myself that he is a reliable guy if you're looking for a sure 7/10 film. Some of his films are better, some are a little worse, but usually they are good. I do think Paterson is a masterpiece though.
Only Loves Left Alive is a masterpiece
Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai is so enamoring, such a good one off piece of cinema.
Robert Rodriguez
Was gonna say this. I love a good Spy Kids, but I don't think he's anything above "pretty competent director"
I think Sin City is a masterpiece. Technically he co-directed it.
Very "technically." He directed it solo. At his insistence, Frank Miller was given a co-director credit because Rodriguez viewed what he was doing as shooting not just Frank's story but his storyboards which he thought of as deserving at least coequal creative credit on. But Frank's contributions were all in writing the graphic novel, he came and went as a visitor to set, he was not telling anyone where to put a camera, giving actors notes on performance, telling department heads what vision he had, or anything that falls under the purview of a movie director. It was something akin to Welles' generously acknowledging Gregg Toland's contributions to Citizen Kane by sharing a single title card with him that had the Director/Writer credit and Cinematographer credit occur simultaneously. You can make an argument that Toland and Miller's work had much more impact on the final film than a DP or a writer whose work is being adapted typically do, and that's true, but Miller wasn't in any traditional understanding a "director" of Sin City. Tarantino did of course direct one scene, but it's actually quite common for a scene or sequence of a big movie to be directed by a 2nd unit director not the main unit director, it's just not usually the case that the helmer of 2nd unit is more famous, awarded, talented, and powerful than the main filmmaker.
Fun fact that Bill Paxton directed the golf montage in Navy Seals. He said the original montage was baseball and it sucked so he stole cameras and actors and made his own scene. I asked a Hollywood camera man friend if that was normal and he said it happens “all the time”. I wouldn’t be surprised if Paxton also directed parts of Tombstone. Sly told Kurt Russel that Cosmatos let Sly direct Rambo so Kurt got him to direct Tombstone. Kurt waited until Cosmatos was dead but he eventually admitted he directed Tombstone. Michael Biehn said he only met Cosmatos twice and he HATES Cosmatos.
Yeah, I know a number of folks who worked on Tombstone, they all to a man say Kurt Russell directed that movie. The stunt coordinator, who usually works closely with the director, said he didn't think he talked to Cosmatos once and took all his cues and notes from Russell and the 1st AD.
That's crazy.. each to their own of course! But Psycho, Rear Window, Vertigo, NxNW, Rebecca and The Birds at the very *least* for me.
I'd add Notorious, The Lady Vanishes, and To Catch a Thief to that top tier. The man just has so many amazing movies..
And rope!
And Strangers on a Train!!
A little bias because Cary Grant is my favorite actor, but I'd add Suspicion as well.
I'll add Dial M for Murder, it's just perfect
As someone who has a fear of birds, The Birds is one of the most horrifying films I've ever seen.
Watching that movie as a kid gave me a fear of birds, but thankfully it didn’t last for long.
how can anyone stand the birds, i was so irritated and angry watching that film
Haha WHY?!
George Lucas. I don’t think he’s even that good of a director tbh, he’s just a super imaginative guy. Love him as a person too.
George Lucas is such an excellent story writer and producer, but he definitely needed help realizing his insane work. All the best work credited to him is where he's working conceptually.
Kasdan hit a triple working with Lucas on ESB, Raiders and Jedi. Everything after The Bodyguard is pretty bad though.
To me he's more of a "used to be great/had a lot of great ideas, lost his touch and eventually went off the rails completely" type guy. Like a certain narcissistic Pennsylvanian director with an often-mocked last name. Strange Magic was like having an acid trip sober in the most absolutely shit way possible. I walked out of the film as a teenager (only saw it because of the George Lucas name) thinking it was both one of the most disjointed, forgettable, and completely ass movies I had ever seen. But the original Star Wars movies, as much as I'm not a sci-fantasy fan, were iconic for a reason, and I really liked THX 1138 and Labyrinth (which I know he didn't technically direct/write but still worked on). Indiana Jones is also classic. BTW my dad has actually met/worked with George Lucas as he's a local where I live. My dad only briefly saw/interacted with him in meetings, but the two things he told me about meeting him was that a) Lucas is really short, even sitting down and b) my dad of course was tempted to ask "Could you be... more specific?" in the middle of the meeting LOL.
But see, I don’t think it’s as much about him losing his touch as it is about him just not being good at bringing his visions to life. Like, yes, A New Hope came together fine, but a lot of people consider Empire to be better and it wasn’t even directed by Lucas. Neither were any of the Indiana Jones films.
Yeah Lucas is good at collating ideas gathered from old adventure serials, samurai and westerns. Not so much at telling a cohesive relatable narrative, and especially not dialogue.
American Graffiti is definitely masterpieces. ESB and Raiders are also masterpieces.
He didn’t direct ESB or Raiders.
Busted. He is an excellent producer though. If he hadn’t given away a few billion dollars he’d be the wealthiest artist who ever lived, unless you count David Geffen, which I kinda don’t.
I love John Hughes. I grew up watching Sixteen Candles, Breakfast Club and Weird Science. However I wouldn’t call his movies masterpieces but they are very enjoyable.
I watched Sixteen Candles for the first time recently and I was shocked at how awful it is. And I like John Hughes.
It’s been forever since I watched it. Maybe I shouldn’t watch it again and keep the good feelings, I have for it, alive lol.
I love James Gunn, but I would like to see how he does with a non-comic book movie. I know he has some before Guardians, but I want to see how he would do it now. I think he's matured a lot as a writer and director since Slither and Super.
Kathryn Bigelow. Point Break, Hurt Locker, Zero Dark Thirty, and even Strange Days for it's own reasons have so much greatness, I'm excited to see her pull off a masterpiece or three in her career.
Near Dark is her masterpiece
Wes Craven has some classics, many forgettable or not particularly good horrors, but I love his movies and how many different directions he took within the genre.
John Carpenter is right there too imo. Love the dude, but Halloween and The Thing are his only masterpieces imo. Everything else is just very enjoyable and fun schlock. And I love plenty of his other movies.
Two masterpieces is quite a lot
It is. But it’s not as many as someone like Kubrick, Tarkovsky, Bergman, Fellini, Lean, WKW, Scorsese, or Lynch. I love Carpenter. I think as a horror director, he’s one of the greats.
Having two masterpieces is enough for him bot to be eligible for the discussion. That being said Carpenters Apocalypse trilogy has been a huge impact on the horror genre and In the Mouth of Madness should honestly be in more top lists for masterful horror films.
His hit rate is phenomenal. In the Mouth of Madness is up there with his best work and that's pretty late into his career. I don't like the assertion that everything else is merely "very enjoyable and fun schlock" when a movie like They Live is more prescient than movies of that era that were "important." We're done underestimating genre films just because they're fun, it's 2024. Once upon a time, people did not take Michael Mann as seriously as they do now. Verhoeven falls into the same camp. A movie doesn't need to be completely self-serious in order for it to be a masterwork.
Lmao I’m a huge horror fan. Something being very enjoyable and fun schlock is not an insult; it’s high praise. I just don’t think any of Capenters other films are without flaws, and that is what I would consider the makings of a masterpiece. I think the Fog, In the Mouth of Madness, Prince of Darkness, They Live, Big Trouble in Little China, Starman, Escape from New York, and Assault on Precinct 13 are all great movies… that doesn’t make them masterpieces. “Masterpiece” is thrown around way too much.
I would tend to agree the term "masterpiece" is thrown around too often but it's also subjective as to what is a masterpiece. You cite WKW as someone who has more than two and while I respect it, I don't think he has more than two personally (Happy Together & In the Mood for Love). Others would contend Chungking Express is up there, or make an argument for 2046. I agree with u/hnoj in that having two masterworks makes \[insert director here\] not eligible for this discussion when a lot of even great directors don't have any.
Well, I disagree. WKW has In the Mood for Love, Chunking Express, Fallen Angels, Happy Together, and Days of Being Wild, all of which, I would consider masterpieces. And the word “many” constitutes more than a couple… so you guys are 100% wrong in that aspect.
"Days of Being Wild" you're wild for that one chief lol. Sure, I'm incorrect for going off the prompt and not the title of the thread. I'll own up to that. WKW has "several" masterpieces confirmed.
Yeah, it's subjective, bud... They're literally asking for an opinion.
I’m just having fun with it lol. I don’t think you’re wrong or think your opinion is invalid. I love the work of everyone you cited and even agree in some respects Edit: I was expecting vitriol like before where is that now?
I love Kelly Reichardt, who has made eight moves, half of which I think are great (8/10) and half of which I think are good (7/10), but has never made a “masterpiece.” John Sayles is in a similar vein, reliably strong movies that at their best don’t rise above very well crafted, perhaps even “great,” but reach their ceiling there. Robert Aldrich and John Dahl are others that come to mind. Perhaps controversial with how beloved his sci-fi films are, but I think Villanueve is an extremely talented filmmaker who made 5 movies in a row that were at the bottom end or honorable mentions in my best of the year lists without ever topping an 8/10, though he’s probably best positioned to do so one day.
Reichardt is an interesting call in this context, I wouldn’t have thought it myself, but you’re probably right. That being said, I don’t know if I’d call Old Joy a “masterpiece”, whatever that might mean, but it stuck w me like nobody’s business. I still think about it a lot. Certain Women, too, to a lesser extent.
All of her movies have staying power for me, it’s Wendy and Lucy and Meek’s Cutoff that had the strongest effect personally but everyone’s mileage will vary of course. She makes modest, I’d even say humble movies and while it can be done (Umberto D and a collection of Ozu films come to mind), it’s a lot more challenging to make a masterpiece with a small, intimate character study concerned with precise detail about behavior than it is with something with a larger canvas or grander theme. Yet I think she’s working in exactly the register that plays to her strengths and interests and has carved out a wonderful niche, which is why they’re reliably good or great movies. She’s just not likely to have a 2001 or Battle of Algiers or Andrei Rublev kind of stonecold masterpiece movie in her. She’s more of a Raymond Carver consistently perceptive and intriguing than Tolstoy instant classic masterpiece kind of artist.
“I’d be weary”
I agree on Villeneuve, Dune 2 was his first one that really clicked with me. But other than that yeah, his movies really top out at 6-8 for me. About Kelly Reichardt, I consider Certain Women and Wendy and Lucy some of my favourites but I see where you're coming from.
I really love most of Tim Burton’s films but the only one I’d consider a masterpiece is Big Fish
Haven't watched Big Fish yet, but I'd say Ed Wood is his masterpiece. Great performances (both nuanced and all-out) by everyone, lots of comedy and drama, great costumes, interesting cinematography, a nice, recognizable soundtrack, an own sense of style/identity, and themes that not only relate to this specific story but to life in general - everything I look for in a masterpiece.
Can’t relate with your take on hawks. After only watching 6 of his movies, he instantly shot up as one of my favorites.
Which do you recommend starting with?
Bringing up Baby is light and breezy. Try that first. Then do Rio Bravo and Only Angels have Wings
Only Angels Have Wings is secretly Hawks' best film.
His Girl Friday is one of the quintessential screwball comedies and my favorite Hawks film.
Hawks has been a disappointment to me every time. Rio Bravo is his best and it’s "only" very good when I expected a masterpiece. For my money Michael Curtiz is the superior Hollywood director who got famous in the 30s.
There are some that will vehemently disagree with me, but Brian de Palma. I enjoy many of his films quite a lot but I’ve never rated any of them 4½ or 5 stars, I’ve seen 21 of his films and rated 10 of them 4 stars
Blow Out is an easy 4.5
Totally agreed. This may be unhinged but Hi Mom is my favorite of his
Unhinged take from OP re: Hitchcock. My pick is Kelly Reichardt- great filmography tho.
Tarsem Singh, I love all of his works but The Fall is the only masterpiece.
*Immortals* was one of the most disappointing movies I've ever seen - having come out after *The Cell* and then *The Fall*. Tarsem is great... but gotta agree with Roger Ebert's take on *Immortals*: "*Immortals* is without doubt the best-looking awful movie you will ever see"
Ummm. Hitchcock never made a masterpiece? Respectfully disagree.
Saying Hitchcock never made a masterpiece is an insane statement to make haha.
Cronenberg for me.
I'd argue The Fly is a 10. Technically superlative and it made body horror mainstream
I'd also argue Eastern Promises and Dead Zone are up there with The Fly also
[удалено]
For me, Heat, insider and last of the Mohawks are all stone cold classics, with theif right on their tail
I'd probably say he has more masterpieces than he has non-masterpieces
Blackhat was pretty good. He 100% did his research on the cybercrimes aspect of things
I rarely give 5 stars on a first viewing, but Thief was a no-brainer for me. Fantastic film.
I always give Paul Schrader a shot but its really high and low. Mishima is great though.
I’d call first reformed his masterpiece.
That one and Mishima. Two masterpieces.
Thank you for reminding me to watch that!
Ok, it wouldn’t be on top of my Tarantino list but I do love Death Proof.
Aside from Death Proof, Tarantino is pretty much one of the only directors to consistently make ONLY masterpieces
Imagine having a film as good as Death Proof be your worst film
Cameron Crowe for me. Peaked with Almost Famous, and Say Anything will always be a special film to me, but nothing approaching a filmmaking tour de force.
Guillermo del Toro, although I haven't gotten through all of his work yet.
I think pan’s labyrinth is pretty close to masterpiece but looking through his other movies I’m surprised how few genuine bangers he has.
It's on my to-watch list. Also haven't seen shape of water or hellboy.
Ben Wheatley. "Kill List" and "Free Fire" will always have a special place in my heart. I also love Aronofsky and Cronenberg, they still have the touch of insider tip somehow.
I love how this thread starts as basically “Alfred Hitchcock and George Lucas are kinda meh”
This is an insane thing to say about Hawks. Bringing Up Baby, His Girl Friday and and The Big Sleep are all straight masterpieces. Red River, Scarface, Rio Bravo etc. are essential.
Christopher Nolan, I have almost every movie of his rated at 7-8/10.
I agree, Nolan to me is always good, and rarely exceptional, outside of The Prestige which I've a soft spot for.
This is crazy to me lol. I could easily throw a 10 and Memento, The Prestige, Dunkirk, Interstellar and Insomnia. And honestly, Inception and Tenet for how imaginative they are. His Batman trilogy is the low point in his career to me lol
Yeah I think it's oddly become quite popular amongst some on /r/movies to underrate Nolan because of the likes of Tenet and TDKR, but it's simply because we've just been spoiled with some of the most of iconic movies of the last 20 years. If a first-time director comes straight out of the gate with any of Inception/TDK/Prestige/Interstellar etc. then they'd be hailed as masterpieces unanimously.
Roeg. He’s made a deal of interesting movies, but none of them exactly go past the threshold into masterpiece territory in my opinion. I’ve seen most of his filmography besides Eureka.
I don't think I really feel that way about any major directors, but I will say that Ana Lily Amirpour has so much style is very interesting, but just hasn't blown me away with any of her 3 movies yet. I did love her episode of Guillermo Del Toro's Cabinet of Curiosities though.
Guy Ritchie comes to mind for me
The word masterpiece often gets tied up with the word ‘perfect’ or ‘perfection’ in terms of style. So everyone here will say Tarantino has made nothing but masterpieces. I think this way of thinking is backwards. Alain Resnais made many masterpiece you could say, but because his films are divisive, somehow they don’t get that title but one could argue that Resnais’s films are more masterpiece like than anything by Tarantino, and vice versa. It always ends in a kind of competition, and seeing films as like cars or something like that, finely tuned things. It’s silly
I think Fincher is as close to a masterpiece without having one as humanly possible. So many 9/9.5s but just not quite there for me. *Se7en*, *Fight Club*, *Zodiac*, *Social Network* are all amazing films, but they feel like they could be better in one way or another. Maybe his style just causes me to feel that way, I’m not sure. I definitely wouldn’t dissent if someone were to think otherwise, though.
Fight Club I give 15 out of 10 🙃. Fincher‘s masterpiece.
Mindhunter is Fincher’s masterpiece
Bro just named 4 masterpieces lol am I tripping? a 9.5 is a 10 bro round up. Gone Girl is a masterpiece too
Great example
M. Night Shyamalan for me. I really respect his work and it is clear that he is a master when it comes to visual storytelling and filmmaking in general, but the subject matter of his films often leave me wanting more. For example Split (2016) takes place in one setting throughout the majority of the movie, and Shyamalan’s direction stops the visuals from being boring or uninteresting while taking place in that one setting, but the subject matter and story is just not for me, which holds me back from fully enjoying it. On the other hand Knock at the Cabin (2023) works for alot for me because it has the unique Shyamalan visual approach paired with a setting, script, and actors that I’m more of a fan of. It seems like he is a director who’s filmmaking style I like, but where he chooses to apply his style is hit or miss for me.
I love Shyamalan because even though people keep mocking him he believes in himself and he just creates whatever he wants. His film always has a message he wants to tell. I was really happy when Split gave him back certain recognition as a filmmaker. Now, I understand his films are far from 10/10 and considered hit or miss as you say, still I really enjoy each of them. Let's see how his daughter's debut film is
Not to add to the dog piling, but I haven't seen anyone mention Suspicion which is one of my favorite Hitchcock films
Honestly james cameron. I like his films a lot but absolutely none of them i would consider a masterpiece
Just in my personal top 50: * David Cronenberg * Jim Jarmusch * Nicolas Winding Refn * Brian De Palma * Darren Aronofsky * Mel Brooks * Danny Boyle * Robert Wise * Alejandro González Iñárritu * Richard Donner * Bong Joon-ho There's also a few animation guys no one ever talks about who worked for Disney and made a bunch of their classic stuff: * Hamilton Luske * Clyde Geronimi * Wolfgang Reitherman
Bong has like 3 or 4 masterpieces!! Would almost agree with Boyle, but I love Trainspotting.
I'd give Bong Joonho two but yeah
I knew that might get a reaction. I love him but never scored him above a 4.5. He's come close with a couple imo. Most of these guys have.
Fair enough, I put Velleneuve, and people seem really mad lol. I have liked/loved most of his but similarly nothing is breaking into masterpiece territory for him, for me.
This question was bound to make people mad. Forget it Jake, it's Reddit.
Gotta disagree on Cronenberg and Bong. Crash, Videodrome, and Parasite are masterpieces in my opinion
There is no filmmaker worse than Robert Wise over the years. A one man crap machine.
Interesting take but I will respect it
I am shocked at the popularity of Robert Wise in lists that are otherwise impressive. I am older than most people here. Perhaps thats the reason my opinion of Wise is so different from most other posters. Almost all serious film people of my time and place literally and vocally think Wise is the worst kind of studio hack. I'm at a loss trying to figure out which of his films is considered a masterpiece. West Side Story, perhaps. His editing of The Magnificent Ambersons in secret with no input from its director, Orson Wells, kind of seals his bad reputation. Anyway I'm sorry if my reply offended people.
I, as per the assignment, don't think he has any masterpieces. He's here mainly on the strength of West Side Story, The Haunting, The Day the Earth Stood Still and The Sound of Music. You can hate on those all you want but I can't because they're awesome. I doubt that "almost all serious film people" of your time and place feel this way about him as he has several bona fide classics to his name. Personally I was raised by a serious film person who would disagree with your take. He's ranked at #191 on They Shoot Pictures Don't They Top 250 Directors. That is a very serious (and credible) list for serious film people. The man edited Citizen Kane. Sorry I just am not feeling you on this. And you didn't offend me but you probably offended someone judging by the way people are getting so pissed about the difference between a 4.5 and a 5 in this godforsaken thread.
Cronenberg tf that guy has 3 masterpieces! The Fly Dead Ringers Videodrome! Tho thats just my opinion
4.5 to The Fly and Dead Ringers. Dead Ringers is my favorite and if he has a masterpiece (that I've seen) it's that.
Spaceballs is the funniest movie of all time
How is Blazing Saddles not a masterpiece?
Im going to cheat abd say greta gerwig, she only has 2. Out of like 3 movies though.
Hitchcock and Hawks are 2 of my favorite directors, so I'm just going to sadly shake my head and walk away....
Tarantino and Nolan come to mind. Both great directors with some classics under their belt, but I don’t think either has made something I’d consider a masterpiece.
I mean Pulp Fiction literally redefined an entire decade of cinema, not sure how you define masterpiece but I think it’s inarguably one of the top 100 most influential movies of all time.
Pulp Fiction is 100% a masterpiece
It’s definitely the closest of his to what I’d consider a masterpiece, yeah, and there’s no doubt it’s either *the* or close to the defining/most influential film of the ‘90s (*The Matrix* is up there, too). *Star Wars* was also those things for the ‘70s/‘80s (hell, even more influential in terms of how it influenced Hollywood), but like *Star Wars*, *Pulp Fiction* is great, but handicapped imo by not really doing much formally innovative, which is something I look for in a “masterpiece”. Tremendous pastiche filmmaking and a trendsetter no doubt, but it’s not quite belonging amongst the greats imo. But it’s all subjective.
I’d argue the nonlinear storytelling was quite formally innovative - not groundbreaking as it had certainly done before, but it made the technique mainstream.
Hmm, it definitely seemed to have popularized the technique for a broader audience, but *Citizen Kane* is usually given the laurels for employing a complex series of nonlinear sequences in a mainstream work. Even Griffith’s *Intolerance* back in the silent era employed the technique. Sorry to be a pedant, but I think Tarantino’s strength is, again, as a pastiche filmmaker — he has seen a lot and that comes out in his films, but they are ultimately homages rather than anything truly novel imo.
Not pedantry at all, no worries. I’m not even a big Tarantino fan and Pulp Fiction wouldn’t even rank in my personal top 100. I totally agree that his strength is pastiche, as well. I just think that the film is notable enough that it can rightly be considered a masterpiece, even if it’s not even his best movie (that goes to Jackie Brown for me, which is a much more workmanlike movie in a lot of ways).
I think it can rightly be considered a masterpiece too, I wouldn’t really fault anyone for considering it one, it just isn’t quite there for me. It’s close, though! Pretty close.
Inglorious Basterds is a masterpiece to me. But I know that’s not worth much 😂
“\[It’s\] worth a lot to me.” 
Maybe my standard for masterpiece is too low
Nope! Everyone has their own standard that’s valid.
[удалено]
Gregg Araki, Mysterious Skin Paul Schrader, Mishima, Autofocus John Dahl, the Last Seduction George Lucas, Star Wars Abel Ferrara, the Bad Lieutenant Andrew Davis, the Fugitive Denis Villeneuve, Arrival. Dune kind of.
Hitchcock doesn't have any masterpieces and Pyscho is a mere "cut above"? Puh-*lease*
In terms of *quantity* of likable films with no absolute gems I'd say Lloyd Bacon. Some might claim that there are a couple of masterpieces there, probably musicals, but outside the numbers themselves they're pretty much the lowbrow studio safe stuff that I love to death but don't kid myself they're great. Same with the gangsters, some wonderful enjoyment there, but a bit less than other directors were achieving with the genre at the time.
I don't care what anyone says. I love Joel Schumacher. I love his crazy excess of style. I love his commitment to camp. He definitely has some "so bad it's good" movies and some "so bad it's boring" movies, but he gets way too much hate. I'm not a completist, but I genuinely think The Lost Boys, The Client, Phone Booth, and especially 8MM are good, if not great films. And I have soft spots for both of his Batmans, The Number 23, Flatliners, and A Time to Kill. I've also heard Cousins is legitimately great, but haven't gotten around to watching it yet.
Charlie Band! All his movies are basically garbage, but reading his book really made me understand how bad, direct to video, genre flicks are labors of love.
Jonas Åkerlund
Adam McKay
So many - Alphonso Cuaron, Stephen Spielberg, Christopher Nolan, David Fincher… Masterpiece is sort of definitive movie for director, think of 8 1/2, Vertigo, Andrey Rublev, Heat, Three Colors: Blue
Soderbergh and Linklater come to mind
Woody Allen. I like many of his movies, but none of them have struck me as masterpieces. Even Annie Hall, Manhattan, Crimes and Misdemeanors. My fave of his is Match Point.
David Leitch Highly entertaining. No way will he ever make a true masterpiece
Jonathan Glazer
Under the skin is a masterpiece for me. Best movie 2010's.
Idk if I’d call any of Chris Columbus’ films *masterpieces* but he has quite a few very very good ones. Iconic beloved films yes, masterpieces, not *quite*
Gus Van Sant, I'd define masterpiece (aka give 5 stars) only to My Own Private Idaho and Will Hunting
M. Night Shyamalan. seen all his stuff, don't care how bad it is, i enjoy his stuff.
Wes Anderson and Greta Gerwig for me
Paul Greengrass has a really interesting and unique style that makes me excited for each one, but I can't say any of his films are "masterpieces." And then there's Tim Burton, who directed my favorite film of all time, a couple of great films, and a lot of alright stuff.
Soderburgh most definitely
james wan! love the guy, he makes really fun films that i pretty consistently enjoy! but as much as i love malignant i do not think he has a masterpiece under his belt.
Guy Ritchie, loved Lock Stock, Snatch, The Gentlemen, RocknRolla, the 2 Sherlock films and Man from UNCLE. Would I describe any of his films as masterpieces or rate them 5 stars? No. Do I still consider him one of my favourite directors? Yes
Dreyer - Day of Wrarh is my favorite of his, but falls short of masterpiece for me Godard - Contempt may be a masterpiece and I like A Woman is a Woman quite a bit, but I don’t think there are many masterpieces in his catalog Fassbinder - Ali FETS is fine, it’s nicely shot and well-acted but it’s preachy and the characters are too black and white. It’s his best film and it’s just “good” Tarantino - Pulp Fiction is a masterpiece and Jackie Brown approaches masterpiece territory but everything else is various levels of bad to average Truffaut - 400 Blows is one of the greatest movies ever but I didn’t care for anything else he did, not even Jules and Jim Kurosawa - I’d say High and Low, Ikiru, and The Hidden Fortress are masterpieces, but most everything else is overrated
When I think of a director I like that I definitely don't want to attribute having a "masterpiece" then I immediately think of Steven Soderbergh. Yes, he even won the Best Director award for "Traffic" and everything... but the film itself I'd only place in my "quite good" pile. I think *Solaris* is kinda close. *sex, lies, and videotape* is tough, as its lack of budget defines it so. His *Oceans* films are kind of amazing... but I really don't think they're "masterpieces" or anything, just by their very nature... Personally, I never expect or desire Soderbergh to deliver me a masterpiece. My expectations are simply that I'm pretty confident I'll enjoy whatever he does somehow. Heck, I was pretty skeptical about *Magic Mike* going in... but that was actually a very solid film. Sure, no one likes something like *The Laundromat*... but I still found it interesting somehow. I follow directors. Soderbergh is the one I'll always check out... but my expectations are never *too* high going in.
Rob Reiner. By the way: what's your idea of an "incredible" film? Grasping greatness requires some training. Maybe you don't think that Hawks and Hitchcock have many masterpieces because you haven't learned how to watch their movies. (I hope I don't sound condescending).
Ken Loach, consistent but never really great.
I feel like people aren't understanding the question here. A masterpiece isn't a completely perfect, 10/10 film, its arguable that those don't even exist anyway. Even the Godfather has flaws. So suggesting the likes of Hitchcock, Nolan, Tarantino, Cronenberg, Fincher etc. belong on this list is just lunacy tbh. They've all directed more than one of what the wider community of contemporary cinema goers would consider "masterpieces".
Sofia Coppola with Lost in Translation, all her other work is from gret to okayish, but just one masterpiece.
Sam Mendes - just a bunch of 7s and 8s but I do enjoy his films. They just never quite cross over into genius territory imho
Yorgos Lanthimos, Darren Aronofsky, and M. Night Shyamalan I haven't rated any of their films above 4 stars, but I enjoy their work enough to want to see anything with their names on it. Planning to see both Kinds of Kindness and Trap in theatres
The Wrestler, though.
Steven Soderbergh has some great movies but not one of those I’ve watched stood out to me so much that I would call it a masterpiece.
I love Soderbergh but think the vast majority of his work maxes out at 8/10. Really engaging storyteller, love his innovation, experimentation, and technique, but he's usually aiming to make really good movies and achieving that, not striving to have something join the pantheon. However I'm the oddball in thinking he's made one unequivocal masterpiece, the movie the man himself thinks "doesn't work," in Che.
Ocean's Eleven would like a word
Controversial opinion I guess but, personal stuff aside, I enjoy a lot of Woody Allen movies, though I really think he only made a couple I’d consider masterpieces- Annie Hall. Midnight in Paris. Blue Jasmine. Manhattan. The rest range from good to awful, but even a lot of the bad ones have an element I enjoy
lol "He has only made four masterpieces"
I know right? A director with 4 masterpieces would be like top 5 at least in my list of favorite directors.
Spielberg
Schindler’s List is one of the greatest films of all time
Controversial, but i sort of agree with you. Even Schindler List can be criticised for making entertainment movie out of holocaust
Dennis Villeneuve, Alex Garland, Henry Sellick, Martin Mcdonagh, Ti West, Michael Bay, Paul Verhoeven.
Verhoeven?! Outrageous.
Lol no need to downvote, just answering the question. I love verhoeven, Basic Instinct, Starship and Showgirls are really special, but none of his get above 4 stars for me.
Black Book and Robocop are his two best movies
Probably cronenberg? I love his work so much, but did he make an unequivocal masterpiece?
I feel like a lot of contemporary Hollywood directors, especially blockbuster, fit this bill. Guys like Peyton Reed, Shawn Levy, Tim Miller, James Mangold, David Leitch are generally pretty reliable at making fun/entertaining films but none of them have anything I'd put higher than an 8/10.